War Games

A collection of models of ``war'' situations were created to demonstate the abilities of disjunctive swarm control.
Each one has some variations as to the rules; however, the nature of the disjunctive control is similiar in all of the cases.
There are two ``teams'' of agents who are considered to be opponents.
These agents exist on a two-dimensional plane using floating-point coordinates between 1 and -1 for both axes.
The outside limits prevent the exit of any agent from the playing area.

Each agents is given a strength, a random number between 0 and 1.
In most of the models, when two agents come near enough to fight, the agent with the higher strength wins.
However, the agent will lose some of its strength in the battle.
When not fighting, or close enough to an enemy agent to feel ``threatened'' the strength will slowly increase.

In this scenario, the speed of a bully
towards the nearest dweeb is set proportional to the separating
distance, i.e. a bully will run quickly towards a dweeb that is
far away, and slowly towards a dweeb nearby. The dweebs
are able to find a sweet spot where they can run slowly
immediately in front the bully and avoid getting caught. One
of the dweebs would typically dance with the bully while
the others would hide out of range.

Please install the Flash Plugin

Centering

In a second scenario, bullies attack dweebs at a
speed independent of their separation. Swarm inversion results
in the dweeb strategy of clustering in the center of playing
field. The bullies attack causing a scattering of the dweebs.
The bullies then concentrate on sacrificial dweebs while other
dweebs return to temporary safety in the center. As in the slow
chase, the effect was of self sacrifice albeit not as dramatic.

Please install the Flash Plugin

Gang Warfare

In gang warfare, a second type of wargame, there are two
gangs, red and blue, both able to retreat or to attack and kill the
other. Each team agent has a randomly assigned strength, and
when agents collide the weak is killed and the strongest agent
survives. However, the winning agent loses strength. When an
agent is killed, the strength of the survivor is decayed by a
factor of 0.9. Furthermore, when an agent is far enough away
from any enemy agent its strength slowly increases. If the
nearest enemy agent is at least 0.1 units away, strength increase
by .001 per iteration.

Red does nothing, while blue attacks and then orbits the strong red agents

Please install the Flash Plugin

The blue team evolved a defensive strategy. Instead
of attempting to kill the enemy agents, the strategy now
prioritizes not getting killed

Please install the Flash Plugin

When given a chance to optimize against the defensive
strategy, an aggressive strategy arose. The defensive blue
strategy, effective in the remains
unchanged. Evolution of the reds, though, has made the
blue strategy ineffective.

Please install the Flash Plugin

Foxes vs. Rabbits

Foxes vs. rabbits is a third example used to illustrate swarm
inversion using disjunctive Combs control. In this model, a
bury of rabbits attempts escape to a hole guarded by an earth
of predator foxes. Like the war model, each rabbit and fox
agent is assigned a strength which determines whether or not
it will survive in combat. However, unlike before, strength
neither degrades or increases over time. There are 200 foxes
and 50 rabbits.

The rabbits rush towards the exit.
The rabbits are not actually trying to
move towards the hole, but rather away from the
foxes. This happens to cause them to move close to
the hole, allowing many to escape.

Please install the Flash Plugin

Since the rabbits were running away from the foxes
rather then towards the hole, when the foxes were
evolved against this behavior they developed a strategy
of confusion. The foxes occupy the corners of the area
thus keeping the rabbits in the center,

Please install the Flash Plugin

The rabbits were gain evolved.
Predictably, the rabbits head towards the target unimpeded while the foxes, still applying their confusion
tactics, remain huddled in the corners.

Please install the Flash Plugin

At the end of a rabbit
evolution, deception and flanking emerged as a winning
strategy. The repeated evolutions resulted in clever rabbit
behavior. As the foxes placed themselves between the
rabbits and the hole, the rabbits move away from the
foxes thereby drawing the foxes further from the hole.
The rabbits then sneak little by little around the foxes
and make their way to the rabbit hole.